Reddit Takes Australia’s Under-16 Social Media Ban to High Court, Citing Limits on Political Speech

Reddit is pushing back against Australia’s newly implemented social media restrictions for users under 16, taking the matter directly to the country’s High Court. The platform argues that the law — which requires major digital services to block underage access — violates Australia’s implied freedom of political communication.

The ban, which began on Wednesday, applies to ten major platforms including YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, X, and Reddit. Each platform has agreed to comply, though the level of implementation varies. The law requires companies to take “reasonable steps” to verify user age through tools such as ID uploads, bank-linked verification, selfie-based facial estimation, or behavioral inference.

In its filing, Reddit contends that the policy is flawed and overly restrictive. The platform argues that preventing younger teens from participating cuts them off from online communities where political and social issues are openly debated. Reddit also maintains that the political views of young people can influence broader society — including parents, educators, and others who vote.

Reddit further asserts that it should not be grouped with traditional social networks, emphasizing that it functions as a public forum for discussion rather than a friendship-based platform. The company notes that users do not upload contact lists, and most content can be viewed without an account. Paradoxically, Reddit argues, banning accounts for minors may increase risks, since account tools allow for safety settings that limit exposure to harmful content.

The platform stressed that its legal challenge is not an attempt to preserve a younger user base, but a push for more targeted, privacy-conscious protections. Reddit says blanket bans are unnecessary and that alternative measures could safeguard minors without restricting their ability to participate in age-appropriate online communities.

Australian government offices have not commented on the filing, and the case now places the country’s approach to online safety — and its impact on digital speech — under national legal scrutiny.